News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation

5 Key Takeaways: Patent Litigation Trends

Kilpatrick Townsend attorneys Andy Rinehart and Dr. Jennifer Giordano-Coltart recently presented their assessment of trends in patent litigation and prosecution at the firm’s annual patent CLE in Research Triangle Park....more

2017 IP Developments [Video]

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

Brinks Gilson & Lione attorneys discuss the issues that will be front and center on the minds of intellectual property departments and attorneys in 2017. Firm president Jim Sobieraj will moderate this panel of presentations...more

Analysis: Supreme Court Oral Argument in Sandoz v. Amgen

by Goodwin on

The transcript of the April 26 Supreme Court oral argument in Sandoz v. Amgen has been posted online. As we covered briefly, the questioning during today’s argument focused primarily on three points....more

Reminder: Supreme Court Arguments on April 26th in Amgen v. Sandoz

by Goodwin on

As a reminder to our readers, tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Amgen v. Sandoz regarding the following questions: ..Whether a biosimilar applicant is required by 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(2)(A) to provide...more

Federal Circuit to PTAB: No Short Cuts Allowed

Today, the Federal Circuit, vacated-in-part and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s obviousness determination regarding a Securus Technologies patent directed to systems and methods for reviewing conversation data...more

Supreme Court Preview -- Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. -- 180 Day Notice of Commercial Marketing Provisions of BPCIA

On Wednesday, April 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc, involving interpretation for the first time of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA"), which was enacted...more

UV Curable Coatings: No Exergen, but PTAB Decision Leads to Stricken Inequitable Conduct Defense

In a recent decision in UV Curable Coatings for Optical Fibers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1031, Judge MaryJoan McNamara struck a respondent’s inequitable conduct defense, which the respondent based on the complainants’ conduct during...more

Supreme Court Oral Argument in Sandoz v. Amgen

by Goodwin on

The Supreme Court held a 70-minute oral argument in Sandoz v. Amgen this morning. Before beginning the argument, the Chief Justice announced that the Court would give each side five extra minutes–a highly unusual step...more

Court Denies Attempt to Prevent “Plain and Ordinary” Claim Construction Proposals

The presumption that claim terms should be interpreted using their plain and ordinary meaning, absent express intent to the contrary, has long been a staple in claim construction. Parties often submit proposed constructions...more

Allergan Successfully Invalidates Claims Relating to Using Botox to Treat Back Pain

by Jones Day on

Allergan is typically the patent holder in these types of disputes, however, it recently successfully played the role of petitioner in an IPR against 1474791 Ontario Ltd.’s U.S. Patent No. 6,806,251 covering the use of...more

PTAB Denies Petitioner’s Second IPR Because Petitioner Strategically Delayed Filing to Take Advantage of Feedback from PTAB on...

On April 13, 2017, a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) panel denied institution of inter partes review (IPR) of patent claims that were the subject of a previously filed IPR by the same petitioner. The panel found that the...more

PTAB's Decision Not To Institute IPR Is Relevant In A Co-Pending ITC Investigation

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

ITC complainant Aspen Aerogels, Inc. (“Aspen”) filed on March 24, 2017 a motion and supporting memorandum to reopen proceedings for receipt of additional evidence. In the Matter of: Certain Composite Aerogel Insulation...more

Planning to Request Discovery for a European Patent Office Proceeding? Not So Fast, Rules the District of Massachusetts

The Hon. F. Dennis Saylor, IV of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently denied a petitioner’s request under 28 USC § 1782 to take discovery related to patent inventorship in connection with an...more

Supreme Court Preview -- Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.

On Wednesday, April 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. case. This case involves the interpretation of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA"), which will be...more

“Waive” That Issue Goodbye: The Importance of Preserving Arguments and Developing a Full Record

by K&L Gates LLP on

The Federal Circuit recently reminded litigants of the importance of developing a full record in district court and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) proceedings. In Google Inc. v. SimpleAir, Inc., the Federal Circuit...more

Motions to Exclude Expert Testimony Before the PTAB Are Rarely Successful: Make Your Arguments in Substantive Responses and...

It is common for both petitioners and patent owners to present expert opinion testimony in post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trail and Appeal Board (PTAB). In many cases, parties have moved to exclude all or part of...more

Fairchild (Taiwan) Corp. v. Power Integrations, Inc.

In my last post, I discussed estoppel in the context in inter partes review, in which defendant filed for IPR after losing in the courts. The Board found the claims-in-suit to be obvious. The Federal Circuit affirmed that the...more

Novartis AG, LTS et al. v. Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. – Prior Judicial Opinions Don’t Bind the PTAB

After Novartis’ patents were found nonobvious by the Fed. Cir., affirming the Delaware District Court, defendant Noven filed for inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. Pat. Nos. 6316023 and 6335031, on rivastigmine and an...more

Judge Andrews Grants Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Certain Patent Counterclaims after Finding the Subject Patents Claim Abstract...

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in D&M Holdings Inc. et al. v. Sonos, Inc., Civil Action No. 16-141-RGA (D.Del. April 18, 2017), the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s...more

PTAB Life Sciences Report -- Part II - April 2017#2

About the PTAB Life Sciences Report: Each month we will report on developments at the PTAB involving life sciences patents. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc. et al. v Janssen Oncology, Inc. PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00853;...more

Is there a legislative fix for biotech patents?

by Morrison & Foerster LLP on

By some accounts, we have entered a golden age for innovation in personalised medicine. Through scientific advancements in the study of genetic coding and molecular analysis, it is now possible to screen an individual for...more

Little Words That Can Make a Big Difference: i.e. Versus e.g.

The difference between “i.e.” (id est, “that is”) and “e.g.” (exempli gratia, “for example”) comes up in patent cases from time to time. While the difference is not always clear to some practitioners, it is clear to the...more

Pharmaceutical Compound Nonobvious Absent Evidence Suggesting Specific Modification to Prior Art Compound

by Jones Day on

The PTAB issued a final written decision in IPR2016-00204, upholding the validity of claims 1–13 of Patent RE38,551 E (“the ’551 patent”), which covers the antiepileptic drug VIMPAT® (lacosamide)....more

SAS Urges High Court to Restore Balance to AIA Post-Grant Framework

by Jones Day on

Who makes the country’s patent laws—Congress, or the Patent Office? A recent petition for certiorari filed by SAS Institute, Inc.—represented by a team of Jones Day lawyers—asks the Supreme Court to decide that question in...more

Fed Circ Affirms Conflicting Invalidity Determinations from District Court and PTAB

by Jones Day on

As we have previously discussed on this blog, when considering an issue of patentability such as definiteness under section 112, the PTAB and a district court may properly reach opposite conclusions. In Tinnus Enterprises LLC...more

4,196 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 168
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!